Category talk:Americans
This is very close to breaking 1000. Kind of cool. TR 21:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC) :I wonder if Hitler's War could put us over the top. ::I kind of hope not, actually. I'd like to see HT do a purely Eurocentric multivolume epic this go around, mirroring 191's Americentrism. No reason to expect it too much, and I can't tell you WHY I like this idea, but I do. TR 22:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC) :If not, I'm sure we could shake loose 47 more super-minor characters if we pore over 191 and 127. Turtle Fan 22:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC) ::Oh, no doubt. Poring over HFR might do the job by itself. If I had access to the earlier volumes, I'd be on it. TR 22:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC) :::If I continue doing articles on T2G, that probably will be enough to put us over. What I'm really interested in is breaking 5000 articles on the wiki. ML4E 00:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC) ::::That will probably come shortly after. TR 00:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC) :::::5000 will be nice. From what I've seen of other Wikis, that could put us in the first rank with the Star Trek and Star Wars sites. We won't be as big as they are, of course, but we will join them on a short list of 5000+ 'ers. Turtle Fan 03:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC) ::::::Really? That's fairly good company. TR 15:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC) Historical Confederates Since we're now incorporating more historical info, historical Confederates should probably also be listed in this category. TR 19:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC) From the work you have done so far, I would say yes. ML4E 02:48, 17 January 2009 (UTC) :Word em' up! TR 02:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC) Only four left Our first 1,000 entry category. This is quite exciting. TR 01:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Woo-Hoo! We made it! Turtle Fan 02:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC) :I confess to being a bit surprised that we've only added another 58 or so Americans since February. Don't know why, exactly, but I am. TR 12:17, October 4, 2009 (UTC) ::I was expecting more Americans in HW myself. Considering how hugely exciting the ones who were there were, I'm not too disappointed it didn't happen. ::Or maybe I am. If we'd had historical American diplomats and officers being encountered by real POVs, instead of HT dumping in POVs whose job it was to provide a (not terribly interesting) halftime show, the book would have felt so much more complete. Turtle Fan 01:27, October 5, 2009 (UTC) The Valley-Westside War If we are going to categorize the natives as Valley and Westsiders, then I believe those should be subcatted here and the "Americans" cat removed from each character regardless of how they viewed themselves. We did that with the "Topangans" and the "Chatsworthians" born after The Change and all the V-WW characters would have been born well after the war. In the meantime, I think Jonathan's latest edit in the description is unwarranted and should be undone. ML4E (talk) 01:02, January 20, 2016 (UTC) :Agreed. TR (talk) 01:21, January 20, 2016 (UTC) I couldn't put a finger on what bugged me last night but it occurs to me that the two exceptions are for alternates for continent spanning states that are not the USA but are the NAU and the Federated Commonwealths of America. In Disunited States no such national equivalent exists and so they are categorized as "North Americans" instead. In V-WW, they are ... I just checked and they are a mix of "Americans", "North Americans" and blank so setting up the sub-cats is doubly important. I was going to say classifying them as "Americans" is due to them being the descendants of a destroyed America rather than because they are the citizens of an alternate nation like the other two is why no mention should be made of V-WW. This rambling, semi-coherent comment is, of course, moot since the changes were undone but I wanted to get these thoughts down anyway. ML4E (talk) 20:18, January 20, 2016 (UTC) :You wanted them undone, and TR agreed. I felt the same so I just went for it, since we're the three who get to vote on such things. And now that you mention it, your objections line up with mine, which were also a bit vague. Turtle Fan (talk) 23:56, January 20, 2016 (UTC) :I agree with the change being undone, I just wanted to set down clearer reasons for objections after I had a chance to think about it. I do have a couple of questions. First we have the "Topangans" and the "Chatsworthians" double cat'ed here and under "North Americans". I don't recall the rational if there was one. Second, none of the "Half the Battle" or "Secret Names" characters have nationalities. I would say they should be cat'ed as "Americans" given the rational I gave on coming from a destroyed America. Those in the first story are from succeeding generations of an ever expanding and name changing nation which would not give the required three entries. The second story characters are hunter-gatherers without nationhood. ML4E (talk) 20:51, January 21, 2016 (UTC) ::I don't know why the Topangans and Chatsworthians are double-catted either. While I haven't read the HT story specifically, the characters of the main "Change" series got pretty used to not being "Americans" (or "USians" really) by the second book. :::That seems to be the case with the son POV in the HT story who was born after The Change. ML4E (talk) 21:33, January 21, 2016 (UTC) :::How embarrassing. I created the cats with the double categorizations myself. I don't recall the rational but think it might be due to the pre-Change characters thinking of themselves as Americans but they are forming small Kingdoms and Republics in North America. I am thinking that the V-WW characters along with HtB and TN should all be cat'ed under North Americans only given the time lapse. ML4E (talk) 17:56, January 23, 2016 (UTC) :::Taking a closer look at the various HtB articles, it looks like the various kingdom name changes led to the eventual name of Namerican Empire. Categorizing the characters as "Namericans" might work even if its anachronistic. The Empire's name suggests it includes parts of OTL Mexico so cating that under "North Americans" would be more appropriate. Likewise, the TN characters reference Mexico so N.Am. is more appropriate than Am. ML4E (talk) 18:21, January 23, 2016 (UTC) ::For the HtB and SN guys, I'm a little confused: are you saying they should go in the North Americans cat or just Americans? TR (talk) 21:22, January 21, 2016 (UTC) :::I'm suggesting Americans based on them being descendants of such although perhaps North Americans would be more accurate. I suppose that depends on why we double cat'ed the Topangans and Chatsworthians. ML4E (talk) 21:33, January 21, 2016 (UTC) TCotTSD People from the Confederated Provinces should not go here. While there are references to the "Americas" in the novel, at no point do any of the characters identify themselves as "Americans" the way that the characters of North American Union and the Federated Commonwealths of America do. TR (talk) 17:50, April 6, 2019 (UTC) :Also, those are AH, while this one is a whole separate universe. Turtle Fan (talk) 01:30, April 7, 2019 (UTC) ::In that case, they should have their own subcategory within North Americans. TCotTSD is a full-length novel with a plethora of characters.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 04:31, April 7, 2019 (UTC) :::A plethora, is it? And God forbid a single article not be catted to death! Turtle Fan (talk) 06:07, April 7, 2019 (UTC) ::::I see no value in a "People from the Confederated Provinces" category for a single stand-alone novel. Between "TCotTSD Characters" and "North Americans", the characters are sufficiently categorized. TR (talk) 15:28, April 7, 2019 (UTC)